Wednesday, March 27, 2019

Signalled Diffusion Book II: Exponentiating Diffusion



Book II of my "Signalled Diffusion" project can be downloaded here. Book I can be downloaded from a link in this post. Below I reproduce the introduction to  book II. 


Introduction
This is Book II in my current series about diffusion. It investigates the possible meanings of equations of the form

…where  the "house" symbol represents the multidimensional equivalent of the "Del" operator.

In interpreting the meaning of equations of this kind my concern is to investigate the possible sub-microscopic mechanisms which will return equations like the above, at least as an approximation. But this logic cannot be reversed: This equation doesn’t logically entail the submicroscopic approximations from which it is derived. That is, we have to hypothesise these mechanisms and then derive the equation; the mechanisms themselves don’t necessarily follow from the equation. Therefore this equation  only constitutes evidence that these submicroscopic mechanisms are in operation and not proof.

As I said in book I my sights are on the case where  the equation becomes a quantum equation: that is when the diffusion constant D, and also V,  incorporate the imaginary number “i”.

Sunday, March 10, 2019

The Creative Forgery of Young Earthism

The creation of the Hitler diaries would have entailed a creation process and therefore a history, but it wasn't the history the dairies purported to tell: They were forgeries. According to the logic of  young earthism the creation is effectively a forgery


Somebody recently asked me the following question: 

I have a friend who, for some reason, is friendly to the idea that God might have created our universe already aged by a few million years, so to speak - so that the universe looks 14 billion years old, but if at the start of creation God kind of zapped it into existence at several billion years old already then it just looks older but is actually much younger.

 Obviously this is a distortion of the true picture - but I wonder if you have any thoughts on this and/or previous blogs on it, because I seem to recall you writing about matters like that before, where creationists claim similar things re the changing speed of light, a universe that God has made look older than it is.


My reply is given below: It includes some clarifying changes and actually concatenates two emails.

***

This is less of an issue than it was in the late 60s and early 70s when young earthism had its revival. For example in the early 70s my wife was told by a young earthist that God placed the fossils in the rocks "as is". The 1961 book "The Genesis Flood" which I read in the mid 70s tells us that God might have created light from the stars in transit.

But young earthists have been trying move away from this "appearance of age" creation (Sometimes euphemistically called "mature creation"); they will admit:
a) It is subversive of science and can block all attempts to do science.
b) Far worse, it questions God's creative integrity.
This "mature creation" can be likened to the person who wrote the fake Hitler Diaries - it's all a lie.

Hence, for modern young earthists much effort is put into flood geology and star light theories in order to try to give scientific account as to why things are the way they are. These theories have come to grief but at least a protagonist can engage them polemically whereas the guy who just claims that it was all created "as is" is difficult to argue with. But even if God created a fake diary it would still have a history in so far as it would require God to assemble it in his mind - hence you can't get away from history as an assembly path.  See here

But one finds that in the final analysis even those young earthists who try do science have to eventually fall back on creation "as is" and are open to being accused of the "Hitler Diary" syndrome. (See my links below)

Science is a data dot joining exercise: We see a pattern of "data dots" and attempt to complete the pattern with a theoretical narrative which joins the data samples into a coherent whole.  We attempt predictions of further dots and those predictions, if correct, point to the correctness of our dot joining theories. But all this is based on the assumption that the data dots are not misleading us; no problem for a non-fundamentalist Christian who believes in God's creative integrity. But it is a problem to a fundie who is effectively positing huge arbitrary holes in the anticipated background structure joining the data dots*. This is basically what the "appearance of age/mature creation" wallahs are trying to tells us; namely that the world is a forgery! I don't buy it!

Some of my writings on the subject can be seen in the links below.



Footnote
* Notice that this back of the envelope sketch of science doesn't recognise the distinction "historical science vs observational science" - the latter is a misleading fundamentalist trope. Science is about timeless patterns and in the exercise of all science both history and observation are always implicit. This is no surprise because every object we observe and study can only be done at the receiving end of  signals transmitted by the object. These signals inevitably have a history of travel.  However, there is such a thing as epistemic distance and this distance varies; some objects are closer to our scrutiny than others, some objects have a greater density of data dots than others and some objects have a greater complexity of behaviour than others: These are all factors that impact epistemic distance, making an object more or less amenable to our epistemology.

The fundamentalist attempt to solve the star light problem by positing a coordinate system which entails the instantaneous arrival of star light at our earthly doorstep (See links above for more on this "solution") immediately creates an issue with the historical science vs observational science dichotomy: This follows because it raises a conundrum as to whether astronomy is to be classified as "historical" or "observational" science!

Thursday, March 07, 2019

A Case Study in Technological Capitalism: Part1: Xenotron vs Paleontological Man.

 
1984: Xenotron's video composer work stations for newspaper page and ad make-up

Between  February 1984 and September 1991 I worked as a software engineer for a UK company called Xenotron. This company was manufacturing and marketing proprietary desk top and plinth computers for the interactive make up of Ads and Newspaper pages. This was done WYSIWYG style by moving around and tweaking blocks of texts on screen. At the time this was an innovative hardware/software combination and a revolution for litho-printers (perhaps comparable to the invention of the printing press?). Xenotron products took the market by storm, so when I joined the company in 1984 it was riding the crest of the "we-did-it-first" wave. But the creative destruction of market dynamics which had brought Xenotron into existence ensured that the Xenotron itself was up for eventual destruction and the last remnants of the company were wound up in 1991. I am in the process of creating documents which tell the Xenotron story via newspaper clippings, memos, brochure photos and notes. The first part of this three part story can be read here

The story I tell reveals just what creative destruction feels like for the lives of its human players, players who may find themselves on the back foot and perhaps not that well adapted to the circumstances creative destruction throws at them. After all (wo)man is a creature whose mode of society, for many thousands of years, was that of the hunter-gatherer. Small hunter-gatherer communities lived in harmony with nature in so far as they could take from nature what she offered with little or no environmentally detrimental effects. But that environment could be cruel and ruthless and this helped ensure that the members of these communities valued each other because each member had their recognised role in providing much needed community support. I suspect that inter-tribal conflicts were fairly minimal in such an underpopulated world where in any case conflicts were pointlessly wasteful when there was so much that needed doing just to survive. But all in all the human animal was undoubtedly well adapted for the hunter-gatherer life style, a style which lasted for thousands of years. I guess that for the people of these primitive communities expectations were seldom crushed because they hadn't been conditioned to expect much from life other than food, shelter, reproduction and above all appreciative human company. There was no time or space for listlessness, depression, disaffection and dissent from one's community; they knew how to enjoy and be grateful for basic pleasures and probably felt fulfilled when they had won these pleasures.

But I don't want to paint too rosy a picture of hunter-gatherer society: They were dirt poor by our standards even though, perhaps, surprisingly happy and contented. They had short rough lives as they faced the ravages of the environment and illness. What made it all tolerable is that they knew (and expected) nothing better. In comparison many of us in the West live like entitled aristocrats having (and expecting) riches and privileges that our ancient forebears couldn't even imagine. But a deep sense of expectation fulfilled, social belonging, tribal identification and social recognition & status, all of which are so important to human feelings of well-being, often allude us. Citizenship has always been a dubious concept since the first cities.

I'm not anti-capitalist or anti-market, but as for the realities of hunter-gatherer life I try to avoid a romanticised vision and instead endeavour to be cognizance of the our society's downsides: Free market industrial scale communities are not entirely successful at satisfying all the needs of the human heart and delivering contentment. Instead, as Marx observed, capitalism has a tendency to breed alienation and dissent in spite of its riches. This is not surprising given that agricultural man is less than 10,000 years old, urban man 4000 years old and industrial and hi-tech man (developments we can thank the free market for) has only been around for a mere 200 to 300 years.  In comparison hunter-gathering was a way of life for perhaps a 100 thousand years or more. Which life style is our psychology best adapted to?

It is not surprising that a creature which battles with selfishness, epistemic challenges and social alienation in a world where expectations are sky-high and where zero sum games abound, some times finds contentment and fulfillment to be illusive. But to be fair modern humanity's relationship with rich market driven societies is ambivalent. On the one hand such societies provide opportunities to express ambition, creativity, and individuality. These rich societies can also satisfy human acquisitiveness and a need to achieve. Also, let's not forget the relatively secure environmental bubble in which we live in Western societies. On the other hand all this comes at the cost of economic instabilities, fractured community spirit, social alienation, purposelessness and boredom. Like the trench warfare of WWI times of stifling empty monotony are punctuated by times of unsettled terror. 

Some of the human ambivalence toward market driven technological society can be seen in the very human details of the Xenotron story where we see the needs of tribal affiliation and creativity initially provided for and yet ultimately tugged at by a wider market dynamic. As I always say,  technological capitalism has made us rich beyond the imagination of our forebears and has given us huge vistas of knowledge but the devil is found in the details.